By Henrietta Appleton, GWCT Policy Officer (England)
Policy Progress – is all about the bLURB
“blurb – a promotional description” (Collins Dictionary)
The Levelling Up and Regeneration Bill (LURB) might not seem a natural policy area of interest for the GWCT. The Government promoted it as “giving local leaders and communities the tools they need to make better places”. As a result, it covers many aspects of future planning policy and in the ‘rural’ context this includes Environmental Outcomes Reports (EORs), the replacement for the EU environmental impact assessments; nutrient pollution standards; protected landscapes (national parks etc); and planning for the mitigation of and adaptation to climate change. Consequently, we have followed its progress closely.
Whilst we commented on the application of the Precautionary Principle in the assessment of both Habitat Risk Assessments and the new EORs, the main foci of activity were wildfire mitigation and nutrient neutrality.
The need to plan for wildfire risk and its mitigation
At both Committee and Report stage we suggested some amendments on wildfire mitigation which were tabled and debated but not put to a vote. The idea of these was to challenge whether the current legislation and the new proposed legislation in LURB provides sufficient duties in relation to this important risk to our future urban fringe and rural landscapes. There is much focus about the need to plan for flood risk but little for wildfire risk.
As events of July 2022 demonstrated the urban fringe (or rural-urban interface) is at risk of wildfires where semi-natural (and unmanaged?) habitats are close to or integrate with settlements. As the London Fire Brigade investigation report for the Wennington Wildfire in East London stated “With the exceptionally hot and dry conditions the wind pushed the fire along the marshland at the rear of the properties [and spread across the Wennington Road] into a standing corn crop… [and] shrubland.” “The fire spread to involve an area of approximately 40 hectares. Within the affected area a total of 17 houses, five garages, 12 stables, a car repair workshop, several vehicles and numerous sheds and outbuildings were 100% damaged by fire.”
Wildfire risk assessments are a vital tool in planning mitigation measures
Our amendment sought to require that planning authorities undertake a wildfire risk assessment which would consider areas of risk, actions to mitigate that risk and guidance to local communities on improving resilience such as FireWise-UK. Whilst the Wildfire Framework for England supports a multiagency approach to wildfire risk, which includes the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities and Defra, we felt that the need for a ‘joined-up’ approach required further promotion. That said the news that the Home Office is scoping a wildfire strategy and action plan, as outlined in the third national adaptation plan published in July, is welcomed.
Nutrient neutrality is a potential income stream for farmers and land managers
Proposed Government amendments to the nutrient neutrality rules, on the basis that this would enable new housing developments without impacting on water quality, provoked much concern. We wrote to a number of peers to point out the impact that such a change would have on the embryonic nature-based solutions marketplace. Nutrient neutrality offers farmers and landowners a strong opportunity to deliver mitigation measures such as new wetlands and reed beds and replace income lost due to changes to farm support. The Government’s concern was that these mitigation schemes are not keeping up with demand and are therefore holding up new developments.
Nutrient neutrality is working – and our Natural Capital Advisory team is involved
Our Natural Capital Advisory team is working with the Environmental Farmers Group in four catchments to deliver a pipeline of over 15 nutrient trading opportunities, worth around £30m in environmental improvements to the farming community and Greenshank Environmental, a consultancy supporting nutrient mitigation across England, states that there are solutions in place for over 70,000 homes across 10 catchments. In addition to plugging the income gap for farmers and land managers we also pointed out that these mitigation measures support broader environmental benefits.
Suggesting a practical solution to nutrient neutrality
Our suggestion that the requirement for developers to have nutrient mitigation in place be delayed to a defined date after build, rather than before building commences as is currently required, was put forward in the House of Lords but sadly the Minister did not respond. We felt this was a practical solution as it would ensure that existing processes and tools in place are not wasted and those who have invested in mitigation solutions are not left with stranded assets (such as Local Planning Authorities) whilst also maintaining the emphasis on requiring developers to fund the measures; the essence of the Polluter Pays Principle.
LURB has returned this week with consideration of the Lords amendments by the Commons – and ping pong begins.